NIS+ is great, except that I'm pretty sure that Windows NT (any version) can authenticate from an NIS server. Microsoft has written an NIS server, but no client.
If I lighten up, will you eat me? I'm sure that there are a lot better things you could be doing than telling people to lighten up on Slashdot.;)
Many of us are bitter because not only do we have to work today, but we had to work on Friday...and many of us would rather read real news than do real work...and this april fools crap is no substitute.
Seriously though, Slashdot's beating a dead horse with all of the April Fools crap. It was funny at first, but now I just want some news.
Gonna have to get a federal posse to round up them damn DMCA violating terrorists...them Linux folks are all communists anyway -- what the hell did you expect?
You're probably right...and I did not want to start an argument based on semantics.
I've only used PayPal for money transfers via (ahem) real banks, and did not know that your could actually make deposits and earn interest on those deposits...although I suppose that if another real bank was managing those deposits and the interest that they generate, it might just make them something other than a bank...more of an accountant...or something.
To shed some light on the topic -- how is Western Union classified?
It doesn't matter -- because with PayPal, users are not depositing money...they're a transfer service. AFAIK, FDIC doesn't necessarily insure money transfers, only deposits.
If America and Canada followed each other's laws just for "consistency" -- America would be tolerating cannabis use and stepping down the drug war instead of running those stupid ads claiming that buying "drugs" supports terrorism.
I've paid anywhere from $50 to $100 per month in the NYC metropolitan area for residental broadband.
Business class DSL in my area, at any speed greater than 128 Kb/s synchronous, is $100 to $600 monthly.
I don't know where you're pulling that $100 a month (or less) from for a reasonable speed business-DSL line. They just don't exist...that's what residential costs.
Some companies are not willing to pick up the extra tab for the more expensive service.
Most companies just don't pay for a car, gas, and tolls. If you get these benefits, you're damn lucky, and there's no cause to whine that your company doesn't want to pay the extra $200 a month for business-class DSL.
My previous employer expensed my residential DSL, but would not expense $250/mo business DSL line. My current employer is the same way.
All I'm saying is that in a sluggish economy, managers are looking for ways to save money. There's alot of struggling tech companies out there asking employees to take cost-cutting measures wherever they can -- in order to save their jobs. How justifyable is it to more than double one of your monthly expenses just to (potentially) save you a few hours of connectivity a month?
While the easy solution is that employers should cover the expense of a business-class line, it doesn't seem that simple.
A business class DSL line is sufficient bandwidth for a small to mid sized office -- and many offices use just this. Managers are not likely to justify spending the cost equivalent to an entire office's connectivity on one employee. (Or worse, every telecommuting employees). In this case, managers will find that telecommuting is not saving them any money over the alternative.
A commuter-class line (as suggested in the first post in this thread) would be ideal for such a situation, but they just don't exist yet. In the mean time, I'd suggest that you find a provider who will offer a dialup until your connestion is provisioned.
about.com uses MySQL and postgres under Linux and FreeBSD for much of their mission-critical data. They also run Oracle on Sun, but may move that to OSS.
Its an old game, and its not even losted on their site anymore -- but I'm sure its out there. It works on both Wintel and Macintosh platforms.
Its heavily based on its AI -- its kind of unique like that. You control this little robot (it has a catchy name, but I forgot what it is) that learns and develops behavioral patterns and intelligence. The premise is that you need to help this little sucker (life form) through a hostile world by affecting the world rather than the character.
You can't control the creature directly, but you can alter its environment to make it do different stuff. You can click on its posterior to give it a push in a certian direction, hit it in the nose to stop it, or push it away -- left, right etc. You can also click on triggers throughout the level (they flash to let you know that they're clickable) to affect the environment to help it to complete a puzzle. the AI is kind of neat -- if you click on/aggrivate your robot too much, it becomes neurotic!
I'd say that its probably less violent than Lemmings (no Lemming nukes or otherwise exploding creatures) -- and probably less than TIM (no gun as a catalyst);).
Again, its a really old game, so you will have to search a little to find it, but a benefit of that is that it will run really old on whatever old hardware you've got...it is 3d, and its got a decent software renderer, and it supports some 3d hardware...not sure of the details though.
Check it out sometime. I'm sure that it will make your kids feel good...or likely better than a detention center/(insert bad stuff here) makes them feel. Hope this helps!
J-Turkey
It ain't too cool bein' no jive turkey so close to Thanksgiving!
My friend and roommate had har puppets and artwork destroyed by Philidelphia's police. She was building puppets and artwork for a political protest.
Their group was infiltrated by police detectives posing as activists. On August 1st, the warehouse was raided by the Philidelphia police (the police called her pupets weapons and considered the paints bomb-making materials). She was arrested along with 80 others in the warehouse (which was legimately rented).
Rather than roll over for the DA and take their slap-on-the-wrist plea bargin, she (and many others) have opted to go to court to not only clear their names, but flood the "justice" system which has so wrongfully screwed them.
This represents a major injustice -- the Philly DA publicly congratulated the police department for so efficently sweeping the undesirables under the rug for the duration of the Republican convention, effectively criminilizing orginization and peaceful protest (and I know this girl -- she's peaceful).
In any case, this is just the short of it, please visit this site for more information.
You can also contact the Philly DA and mayor here to tell them how much this sucks.:
Mayor John Street
City Hall
Philidelphia, PA
(215) 686-2181
District Attourney Lynn Abraham
1421 Arch St.
Philidelphia, PA
(215)686-8701
$150 for a keyboard, mouse and base station...after rebate?!?
Hell, I'm still looking for an excuse to buy a Logitech i-touch wireless keyboard and mouse...but they're only ~$45 apiece according to www.pricewatch.com.
Intel's solution is either really damn good, or just too damn expensive (likely the latter - $150 for a fscking keyboard and mouse is too damn expensive) -- and will someone PLEASE tell me why I would ever need a USB keyboard? Its not like I need the PS2 keyboard port for something else...and I'll have one no matter what. No thanks, I'll wait for better USB support under Linux (RH 7, although nice, has lots of issues -- ever try compiling a kernel on it without editing a makefile by hand? No workie).
Don't get me wrong, I think that the whole wireless thing is cool -- I wish I had something like it -- eliminating all of those cords is great, but this ain't it.
What I'd really like to see is some sort of standard (like IrDA was supposed to be, but better), so I can buy a generic base station and keyboard, along with a Kensington wireless trackball, and whatever wireless game controller works for my needs...all for less than Intel's outrageous MSRP.
I was just thinking a little about security issues with wireless input devices.
Is my wireless keyboard going to be broadcasting everything that I type for a 100 yard radius?
This will effectively make SSH (among other security measuers) useless for preventing plaintext password sniffing since all anyone will need to sniff my passwords (or any other input) is a ~900MHz (or whatever those things run at) receiver...
It would take a little more effort than simply sniffing packets, but i think its a legitimate concern just the same.
It would be very interesting (and worthwhile) to see wireless input transmissions encrypted.
You won't see any citations. The Pro-Drug culture never supplies scientific data to back up their claims.
Oh yeah -- and the Drug-War propaganda is any better?
I can't believe that you'd say this. In the United States, the federal government requires permits for research of any substance labelled a Schedule 1 illegal drug (yes, including cannabis). They are only granted if the permit granting agency can be assured that the study will never show the substance in a positive light. Its hard to come up with this stuff...at the same time, the government doesn't have any real data either.
For example: In their anti-cannabis campaign, they've consistently talked about how today's cannabis is x amount stronger than 60's cannabis...which is completely unsubstantiated as there was no standard testing of the THC content of cannabis in the 60's. The plant matter that they're comparing is indoor grown, organic, hydroponic, high-grade, hand manucured sinsemellia (no seeds) to old ditch-weed.
You tell me which orange (or insert your favorite plant) would be better -- the one carefully grown, or the one in the ditch. Its flawed data from the start.
Whether or not the data is properly scientific -- this example of "scientific data" is irrelevant. It only serves to scare people and curry public favor for the "war on drugs". It doesn't matter how much THC is in cannabis.
That's like saying that beer is dangerous -- but Vodka is deadly and therefore, since this Vodka exists, we need to intensify our enforcement efforts. If I drank 10 beers -- I'd be just as drunk as if I had 10 shots of vodka. If I smoked a great-big Bob Marley of low-grade pot -- I'd be just as high from smoking little joint with some high-grade Vermont organic. So what? So this is the same propaganda that we were fed to support alochol prohibition in the 30's. That didn't work...drug prohibition doesn't either.
It doesn't mean that we need to step-up our enforcement...which we already have, about 8 times...but it doesn't help, it just wanes away at personal liberties -- slowly turning our great country into a police state...which accounts for about 1/25th pf the world's population, but 1/4 of the world's incarcerated population.
On a related note: Under the Clinton administration, more pot smokers have been arrested than any other executive administration (see this link) since Nixon and his controlled-substances act.
By the way, do you have ANY scientific data to suggest why cannabis should be illegal?
Its always sounded to me like a circular argument:
Why is it bad?
Because its illegal.
Why is it illegal?
Because its bad.
In any case, the anti-cannabis stuff really reduces the overall credibility of you anti-drug people who just can't admit when they're just plain wrong (even a little).
But how many people will end up in jail for exploring their own minds? How many people will be victims of violent crimes due to drug law (not drugs)? How much orginized crime will stem from our high demand for drugs, and lack of legal provisions?
This is one of the first reasonable posts I've read on this thread today.
The entire article read like drug-war propaganda. Talking about the drug problem making its way into our mainstrean-whitey society like there's no stopping it...and we should all hang our heads due to the ills of our drug abusing society.
Anyway, I'm glad that there's still folks like you out there who can think for themselves. I'm a techie -- and a pot-smoker. By my own standards (that's what's important, isn't it?) I'm successful. So what's the problem? (Other than this fucking drug war making me a criminal) There's no dirty little secret, and my drug use is hardly 'rampant'.
I'm upset by the LA Times' piss-poor journalism. Again, this is just drug-war propaganda. Disregard it.
The DirectX API was supposed to do this before.
on
Salon on the XBox
·
· Score: 1
Much of this writers sentiment was based on the fact that the total cost (not just $$$) of PC gaming just wasn't worth it for most people.
He also talks about how a major part of the development of PC gaming has boiled down to hardware compatibility. Since PC gaming has opened up to retargetable graphics, we've had to deal with huge hardware compatibility problems. (RTG -- something I haven't made a big deal about since the days of Amiga) All in the end, the user spends huge amounts of time and money just to make games work.
I have two issues with these points -- to make this retort more confusing:),I'll start with the latter.
1. The DirectX API was supposed to make all of the third-party hardware easy to develop for -- and ultimately make it easier on the end-user. (ie not have to buy a periphral based on support)
It didn't do this -- DirectX, while not a developer's nightmare, never really lived up to its promise/expectations. While this could be indicitave of bad 3rd party development practices, I tend to believe that much of the problem falls within the API itself.
Ideally, I should be able to buy the latest, greatest piece of hardware, plug it in, and tell my game of choice to use driver Y instead of driver X...and it should work.
Unfortunately, this is not the case -- its a endless support headache. In some cases, winding up with a support person's instruction to blow on a computer. Or in my case, waiting for, and downloading a seemingly endless series of patches, hoping that someday, one of them will solve my hardware issue (that DirectX was supposed to solve in the first place).
Now if the DirectX API didn't live up to its promise, how can he be so sure that the Xbox will live up to its promise?
The reason that I ask is because my friend at MS/Bungie tells me that Xbox will be based on DirectX 8 and the NVidia NV11. I found that both of the predecessors (DirectX 7 and the NV10) were laiden with problems from the start.
2. Many gamers (such as myself) like the fact that our PC's are a flexible, scalable game platform and are willing to shell out the extra time and $$$($!) on it. I've always veered away from consoles dut to the fact that they're not only limited by their ~640x200 NI NTSC (or in some cases, a flicker-laiden interlaced ~640x400) output and their disposable nature. After they've outlived their usefulness, they're garage-sale-fodder at best -- or if you're like me, it will simply wind up in the garage to serve as a dust-magnet. (I'm too sentimental/dumb about this crap to sell it).
I like the fact that I can upgrade my computer. I love the fact that when my computer has outlived its usefulness, I can make it another Linux box, or use it to screw around with OpenBSD...or when they get REALLY old, that I can use it to replace my (even older) firewall.
Lastly, I am consistently discouraged that most (if not all) console manufacturers refuse to sell PC emulators for their console games.
I find the piracy excuse to be a pussy of an excuse that is beciming the standard with a number large copyright-holding companies.
I mean, this thing is going to be using software/hardware that is almost exclusively within the set of curent PC gaming standards (with the exception of the unified memory architecture)...X86 CPU, Nvidia NV11 graphics, DirectX 8, standard DVD's...this, to me, spells a recipie for the same old PC games, on the same old PC's that we've seen before. Except that Microsoft wants us to buy a console to play them.
In short, although I'd like to share the authors excitment for this gaming renaissance that he thinks the Xbox will bring, I don't think that we're going to see anything that we haven't seen before. Disposable machines, with disposable games, which should work on scalable hardware, but don't. I'll stick with my platform of choice -- the internetworkable, multi-purpose, reusuable, scalable PC.
I think that your analogy using Ralph Nader is skewed. <BR><BR> Nader used the data in his book to push congress to pass automotive safety standard laws that would eventually lead up to laws like the airbag and seatbelt laws...this sort of ruin-it-for-the-rest-of-us legislature means that a company is less likely to market safety in their cars as people tend to trust the government standard of safety (which is marginal, cars aren't safe, period). This also removes power of choice from the consumer. (ie I should be able to choose weather or not I want to pay for a premium safety item in a car, like airbags, anti-lock brakes, rain/snow tires, etc) <BR><BR> This is simply not the capitalist way (and we <I>do</I> live in a capitalist country). Once a hacker publicizes a vulernability, a developer has a choice as to weather or not they want to fix the hole. <BR><BR> If we used your Nader analogy, said hacker would find an exploit, write a book about it, testify before congress, and get a law pased FORCING major corporations to tighten up their code. <BR><BR> Anyone here want legislature concerning code maintainence? <BR><BR><BR> I know that this is a stretch, but this is what Nader did...and the parallel I draw isn't <I>that</I> far fetched. The last thing we need is more people who help create laws which (in one way or another) degrade our civil liberties. <BR><BR> not like I have an opinion or anything
Not only are both candidates admitted ex-drug users...but the current US president (Clinton, in case anyone forgot) has been criticized for being "soft on marijuana".
Here's a fun fact for you all...During the reign of the Clinton administration, there have more marijuana possession arrests on record than any other time in the history of the United States.
Its time that we end this so called "war on drugs". Write your represenative or senator. Tell him or her how you feel.
The ads -- they are the same anti-drug progpaganda that ONDCP and Barry McCaffrey have been cramming down our throat for the past however many (65?) years.
Where is the representation now?!?
I have some pretty serious anti-drug-war ideals, and until recently, I felt comfortable using government resourses to research their freaking drug-war.
I still can't believe that my tax dollars pay for this crap!
The type of encryption used should be app specific.
Why choose one encryption algorithm over another? Well, its usually for the same reson an API is used over another.
Evaluate your needs, ordering them from highest to lowest -- then figure out which algorithm is the best for your project.
For example, it would be stupid to choose an algorithm with a crazy/lengthy interactive protocol for an end user who's computer savviness equates to clicking on his the Netscape window on an iMac. All they want to see is the nice padlock.
If speed it the biggest concern, then sure, speed is important...but it completely depends on the app, and the developer.
Speed, security, export status, length of time data must be secure, implementation, ease of use/transparency, reputation, etc are all factors an engineer must consider.
Customer specification is an overriding factor as well...and sure, some Pointy Haired Boss' out there will tell you to implement something they read about in Newsweek.
You mention Counterpane -- I'm not sure weather or not you're familiar with Bruce Schneier's book, Applied Cryptography. Perhaps there's an updated edition with Twofish info. In any case, this is all discussed (in great detail).
I highly recommend reading this book if you're al all interested in cryptography. Good read, he explains everything in a very simple manner that even I could understand and use to write some pretty cool stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
NIS+ is great, except that I'm pretty sure that Windows NT (any version) can authenticate from an NIS server. Microsoft has written an NIS server, but no client.
If I lighten up, will you eat me? I'm sure that there are a lot better things you could be doing than telling people to lighten up on Slashdot. ;)
Many of us are bitter because not only do we have to work today, but we had to work on Friday...and many of us would rather read real news than do real work...and this april fools crap is no substitute.
Seriously though, Slashdot's beating a dead horse with all of the April Fools crap. It was funny at first, but now I just want some news.
-J_Turkey
Not only that, but rootkit violates the DMCA.
;)
Gonna have to get a federal posse to round up them damn DMCA violating terrorists...them Linux folks are all communists anyway -- what the hell did you expect?
You're probably right...and I did not want to start an argument based on semantics.
I've only used PayPal for money transfers via (ahem) real banks, and did not know that your could actually make deposits and earn interest on those deposits...although I suppose that if another real bank was managing those deposits and the interest that they generate, it might just make them something other than a bank...more of an accountant...or something.
To shed some light on the topic -- how is Western Union classified?
I see where you're coming from -- but is it a deposit, or an escrow?
You can typically earn intrest on an escrow.
I'm not a banker -- and do not know a whole lot about economics. Is the difference between the two only subjective, or real (legally)?
I stand corrected.
It doesn't matter -- because with PayPal, users are not depositing money...they're a transfer service. AFAIK, FDIC doesn't necessarily insure money transfers, only deposits.
If America and Canada followed each other's laws just for "consistency" -- America would be tolerating cannabis use and stepping down the drug war instead of running those stupid ads claiming that buying "drugs" supports terrorism.
-J-Turkey
I've paid anywhere from $50 to $100 per month in the NYC metropolitan area for residental broadband.
Business class DSL in my area, at any speed greater than 128 Kb/s synchronous, is $100 to $600 monthly.
I don't know where you're pulling that $100 a month (or less) from for a reasonable speed business-DSL line. They just don't exist...that's what residential costs.
Some companies are not willing to pick up the extra tab for the more expensive service.
Most companies just don't pay for a car, gas, and tolls. If you get these benefits, you're damn lucky, and there's no cause to whine that your company doesn't want to pay the extra $200 a month for business-class DSL.
My previous employer expensed my residential DSL, but would not expense $250/mo business DSL line. My current employer is the same way.
All I'm saying is that in a sluggish economy, managers are looking for ways to save money. There's alot of struggling tech companies out there asking employees to take cost-cutting measures wherever they can -- in order to save their jobs. How justifyable is it to more than double one of your monthly expenses just to (potentially) save you a few hours of connectivity a month?
j-turkey
While the easy solution is that employers should cover the expense of a business-class line, it doesn't seem that simple.
A business class DSL line is sufficient bandwidth for a small to mid sized office -- and many offices use just this. Managers are not likely to justify spending the cost equivalent to an entire office's connectivity on one employee. (Or worse, every telecommuting employees). In this case, managers will find that telecommuting is not saving them any money over the alternative.
A commuter-class line (as suggested in the first post in this thread) would be ideal for such a situation, but they just don't exist yet. In the mean time, I'd suggest that you find a provider who will offer a dialup until your connestion is provisioned.
-j-turkey
OK -- I'd heard that Tom's has picked up some better writers...
I don't mean to be inflammatory, but that thing looked like it was written by a 15-year-old British high-school dropout.
Hey -- Tom's Hardware...there's plenty of out-of-work folks over here who will write for you (and they have college degrees too).
about.com uses MySQL and postgres under Linux and FreeBSD for much of their mission-critical data. They also run Oracle on Sun, but may move that to OSS.
Check out Galapagos from Anark.
;).
Its an old game, and its not even losted on their site anymore -- but I'm sure its out there. It works on both Wintel and Macintosh platforms.
Its heavily based on its AI -- its kind of unique like that. You control this little robot (it has a catchy name, but I forgot what it is) that learns and develops behavioral patterns and intelligence. The premise is that you need to help this little sucker (life form) through a hostile world by affecting the world rather than the character.
You can't control the creature directly, but you can alter its environment to make it do different stuff. You can click on its posterior to give it a push in a certian direction, hit it in the nose to stop it, or push it away -- left, right etc. You can also click on triggers throughout the level (they flash to let you know that they're clickable) to affect the environment to help it to complete a puzzle. the AI is kind of neat -- if you click on/aggrivate your robot too much, it becomes neurotic!
I'd say that its probably less violent than Lemmings (no Lemming nukes or otherwise exploding creatures) -- and probably less than TIM (no gun as a catalyst)
Again, its a really old game, so you will have to search a little to find it, but a benefit of that is that it will run really old on whatever old hardware you've got...it is 3d, and its got a decent software renderer, and it supports some 3d hardware...not sure of the details though.
Check it out sometime. I'm sure that it will make your kids feel good...or likely better than a detention center/(insert bad stuff here) makes them feel. Hope this helps!
J-Turkey
It ain't too cool bein' no jive turkey so close to Thanksgiving!
My friend and roommate had har puppets and artwork destroyed by Philidelphia's police. She was building puppets and artwork for a political protest.
Their group was infiltrated by police detectives posing as activists. On August 1st, the warehouse was raided by the Philidelphia police (the police called her pupets weapons and considered the paints bomb-making materials). She was arrested along with 80 others in the warehouse (which was legimately rented).
Rather than roll over for the DA and take their slap-on-the-wrist plea bargin, she (and many others) have opted to go to court to not only clear their names, but flood the "justice" system which has so wrongfully screwed them.
This represents a major injustice -- the Philly DA publicly congratulated the police department for so efficently sweeping the undesirables under the rug for the duration of the Republican convention, effectively criminilizing orginization and peaceful protest (and I know this girl -- she's peaceful).
In any case, this is just the short of it, please visit this site for more information.
You can also contact the Philly DA and mayor here to tell them how much this sucks.:
Mayor John Street
City Hall
Philidelphia, PA
(215) 686-2181
District Attourney Lynn Abraham
1421 Arch St.
Philidelphia, PA
(215)686-8701
Man, that's expensive.
;)
$150 for a keyboard, mouse and base station...after rebate?!?
Hell, I'm still looking for an excuse to buy a Logitech i-touch wireless keyboard and mouse...but they're only ~$45 apiece according to www.pricewatch.com.
Intel's solution is either really damn good, or just too damn expensive (likely the latter - $150 for a fscking keyboard and mouse is too damn expensive) -- and will someone PLEASE tell me why I would ever need a USB keyboard? Its not like I need the PS2 keyboard port for something else...and I'll have one no matter what. No thanks, I'll wait for better USB support under Linux (RH 7, although nice, has lots of issues -- ever try compiling a kernel on it without editing a makefile by hand? No workie).
Don't get me wrong, I think that the whole wireless thing is cool -- I wish I had something like it -- eliminating all of those cords is great, but this ain't it.
What I'd really like to see is some sort of standard (like IrDA was supposed to be, but better), so I can buy a generic base station and keyboard, along with a Kensington wireless trackball, and whatever wireless game controller works for my needs...all for less than Intel's outrageous MSRP.
Not like I'm opinionated or anything.
D'oh!
I was just thinking a little about security issues with wireless input devices.
Is my wireless keyboard going to be broadcasting everything that I type for a 100 yard radius?
This will effectively make SSH (among other security measuers) useless for preventing plaintext password sniffing since all anyone will need to sniff my passwords (or any other input) is a ~900MHz (or whatever those things run at) receiver...
It would take a little more effort than simply sniffing packets, but i think its a legitimate concern just the same.
It would be very interesting (and worthwhile) to see wireless input transmissions encrypted.
I wasn't able to attend the last IRC-slash Q&A gathering, so I'm not famailir with the format. Is this going to be moderated?
Some other Jive-talking Turkey wrote:
You won't see any citations. The Pro-Drug culture never supplies scientific data to back up their claims.
Oh yeah -- and the Drug-War propaganda is any better?
I can't believe that you'd say this. In the United States, the federal government requires permits for research of any substance labelled a Schedule 1 illegal drug (yes, including cannabis). They are only granted if the permit granting agency can be assured that the study will never show the substance in a positive light. Its hard to come up with this stuff...at the same time, the government doesn't have any real data either.
For example: In their anti-cannabis campaign, they've consistently talked about how today's cannabis is x amount stronger than 60's cannabis...which is completely unsubstantiated as there was no standard testing of the THC content of cannabis in the 60's. The plant matter that they're comparing is indoor grown, organic, hydroponic, high-grade, hand manucured sinsemellia (no seeds) to old ditch-weed.
You tell me which orange (or insert your favorite plant) would be better -- the one carefully grown, or the one in the ditch. Its flawed data from the start.
Whether or not the data is properly scientific -- this example of "scientific data" is irrelevant. It only serves to scare people and curry public favor for the "war on drugs". It doesn't matter how much THC is in cannabis.
That's like saying that beer is dangerous -- but Vodka is deadly and therefore, since this Vodka exists, we need to intensify our enforcement efforts. If I drank 10 beers -- I'd be just as drunk as if I had 10 shots of vodka. If I smoked a great-big Bob Marley of low-grade pot -- I'd be just as high from smoking little joint with some high-grade Vermont organic. So what? So this is the same propaganda that we were fed to support alochol prohibition in the 30's. That didn't work...drug prohibition doesn't either.
It doesn't mean that we need to step-up our enforcement...which we already have, about 8 times...but it doesn't help, it just wanes away at personal liberties -- slowly turning our great country into a police state...which accounts for about 1/25th pf the world's population, but 1/4 of the world's incarcerated population.
On a related note: Under the Clinton administration, more pot smokers have been arrested than any other executive administration (see this link ) since Nixon and his controlled-substances act.
By the way, do you have ANY scientific data to suggest why cannabis should be illegal?
Its always sounded to me like a circular argument:
Why is it bad?
Because its illegal.
Why is it illegal?
Because its bad.
In any case, the anti-cannabis stuff really reduces the overall credibility of you anti-drug people who just can't admit when they're just plain wrong (even a little).
But how many people will end up in jail for exploring their own minds? How many people will be victims of violent crimes due to drug law (not drugs)? How much orginized crime will stem from our high demand for drugs, and lack of legal provisions?
Just some stuff to think about.
Fuckin' A!
This is one of the first reasonable posts I've read on this thread today.
The entire article read like drug-war propaganda. Talking about the drug problem making its way into our mainstrean-whitey society like there's no stopping it...and we should all hang our heads due to the ills of our drug abusing society.
Anyway, I'm glad that there's still folks like you out there who can think for themselves. I'm a techie -- and a pot-smoker. By my own standards (that's what's important, isn't it?) I'm successful. So what's the problem? (Other than this fucking drug war making me a criminal) There's no dirty little secret, and my drug use is hardly 'rampant'.
I'm upset by the LA Times' piss-poor journalism. Again, this is just drug-war propaganda. Disregard it.
Much of this writers sentiment was based on the fact that the total cost (not just $$$) of PC gaming just wasn't worth it for most people.
:),I'll start with the latter.
He also talks about how a major part of the development of PC gaming has boiled down to hardware compatibility. Since PC gaming has opened up to retargetable graphics, we've had to deal with huge hardware compatibility problems. (RTG -- something I haven't made a big deal about since the days of Amiga) All in the end, the user spends huge amounts of time and money just to make games work.
I have two issues with these points -- to make this retort more confusing
1. The DirectX API was supposed to make all of the third-party hardware easy to develop for -- and ultimately make it easier on the end-user. (ie not have to buy a periphral based on support)
It didn't do this -- DirectX, while not a developer's nightmare, never really lived up to its promise/expectations. While this could be indicitave of bad 3rd party development practices, I tend to believe that much of the problem falls within the API itself.
Ideally, I should be able to buy the latest, greatest piece of hardware, plug it in, and tell my game of choice to use driver Y instead of driver X...and it should work.
Unfortunately, this is not the case -- its a endless support headache. In some cases, winding up with a support person's instruction to blow on a computer. Or in my case, waiting for, and downloading a seemingly endless series of patches, hoping that someday, one of them will solve my hardware issue (that DirectX was supposed to solve in the first place).
Now if the DirectX API didn't live up to its promise, how can he be so sure that the Xbox will live up to its promise?
The reason that I ask is because my friend at MS/Bungie tells me that Xbox will be based on DirectX 8 and the NVidia NV11. I found that both of the predecessors (DirectX 7 and the NV10) were laiden with problems from the start.
2. Many gamers (such as myself) like the fact that our PC's are a flexible, scalable game platform and are willing to shell out the extra time and $$$($!) on it. I've always veered away from consoles dut to the fact that they're not only limited by their ~640x200 NI NTSC (or in some cases, a flicker-laiden interlaced ~640x400) output and their disposable nature. After they've outlived their usefulness, they're garage-sale-fodder at best -- or if you're like me, it will simply wind up in the garage to serve as a dust-magnet. (I'm too sentimental/dumb about this crap to sell it).
I like the fact that I can upgrade my computer. I love the fact that when my computer has outlived its usefulness, I can make it another Linux box, or use it to screw around with OpenBSD...or when they get REALLY old, that I can use it to replace my (even older) firewall.
Lastly, I am consistently discouraged that most (if not all) console manufacturers refuse to sell PC emulators for their console games.
I find the piracy excuse to be a pussy of an excuse that is beciming the standard with a number large copyright-holding companies.
I mean, this thing is going to be using software/hardware that is almost exclusively within the set of curent PC gaming standards (with the exception of the unified memory architecture)...X86 CPU, Nvidia NV11 graphics, DirectX 8, standard DVD's...this, to me, spells a recipie for the same old PC games, on the same old PC's that we've seen before. Except that Microsoft wants us to buy a console to play them.
In short, although I'd like to share the authors excitment for this gaming renaissance that he thinks the Xbox will bring, I don't think that we're going to see anything that we haven't seen before. Disposable machines, with disposable games, which should work on scalable hardware, but don't. I'll stick with my platform of choice -- the internetworkable, multi-purpose, reusuable, scalable PC.
I think that your analogy using Ralph Nader is skewed.
<BR><BR>
Nader used the data in his book to push congress to pass automotive safety standard laws that would eventually lead up to laws like the airbag and seatbelt laws...this sort of ruin-it-for-the-rest-of-us legislature means that a company is less likely to market safety in their cars as people tend to trust the government standard of safety (which is marginal, cars aren't safe, period). This also removes power of choice from the consumer. (ie I should be able to choose weather or not I want to pay for a premium safety item in a car, like airbags, anti-lock brakes, rain/snow tires, etc)
<BR><BR>
This is simply not the capitalist way (and we <I>do</I> live in a capitalist country). Once a hacker publicizes a vulernability, a developer has a choice as to weather or not they want to fix the hole.
<BR><BR>
If we used your Nader analogy, said hacker would find an exploit, write a book about it, testify before congress, and get a law pased FORCING major corporations to tighten up their code.
<BR><BR>
Anyone here want legislature concerning code maintainence?
<BR><BR><BR>
I know that this is a stretch, but this is what Nader did...and the parallel I draw isn't <I>that</I> far fetched. The last thing we need is more people who help create laws which (in one way or another) degrade our civil liberties.
<BR><BR>
not like I have an opinion or anything
Not only are both candidates admitted ex-drug users...but the current US president (Clinton, in case anyone forgot) has been criticized for being "soft on marijuana".
Here's a fun fact for you all...During the reign of the Clinton administration, there have more marijuana possession arrests on record than any other time in the history of the United States.
Its time that we end this so called "war on drugs". Write your represenative or senator. Tell him or her how you feel.
(not that I have an opinion or anything)
The ads -- they are the same anti-drug progpaganda that ONDCP and Barry McCaffrey have been cramming down our throat for the past however many (65?) years.
Where is the representation now?!?
I have some pretty serious anti-drug-war ideals, and until recently, I felt comfortable using government resourses to research their freaking drug-war.
I still can't believe that my tax dollars pay for this crap!
The type of encryption used should be app specific.
Why choose one encryption algorithm over another?
Well, its usually for the same reson an API is used over another.
Evaluate your needs, ordering them from highest to lowest -- then figure out which algorithm is the best for your project.
For example, it would be stupid to choose an algorithm with a crazy/lengthy interactive protocol for an end user who's computer savviness equates to clicking on his the Netscape window on an iMac. All they want to see is the nice padlock.
If speed it the biggest concern, then sure, speed is important...but it completely depends on the app, and the developer.
Speed, security, export status, length of time data must be secure, implementation, ease of use/transparency, reputation, etc are all factors an engineer must consider.
Customer specification is an overriding factor as well...and sure, some Pointy Haired Boss' out there will tell you to implement something they read about in Newsweek.
You mention Counterpane -- I'm not sure weather or not you're familiar with Bruce Schneier's book, Applied Cryptography. Perhaps there's an updated edition with Twofish info. In any case, this is all discussed (in great detail).
I highly recommend reading this book if you're al all interested in cryptography. Good read, he explains everything in a very simple manner that even I could understand and use to write some pretty cool stuff.
Good luck!